Readers of this list
are always well ahead of time.
Sometimes, years ahead. Only now
mainstream America begins to discuss
“Jewish Lobby”, but on this list we
expounded this subject in 2001.
Actually, what we said then, remains
relevant now. Here is a re-run of my
2001 essay A Yiddishe Medina
(A Jewish State, in Yiddish), included
in the
Galilee Flowers, where I ask:

Does America
support Israel because of the Jewish
lobby or because of the ‘true interest
of American corporations’? The putative
answer is: the Jewish lobby is a
superfluous body supportive of the
Israeli right-wing, while America as a
whole is a grander ‘Jewish’ state with
interests outside the Middle East as
well.

In a way, this essay
sums up much of my writing.

A
Yiddishe Medina

By
Israel Shamir

I

America prepares for
a long war. It is called ‘the war on
terrorism’, but the name has no meaning
but ‘a war on the enemy’. Noam Chomsky
gave a witty definition, “terrorism is
what they do to us”. However, in the
course of this war, thousands of our
brothers by Adam and Eve will be
strafed, napalmed and nuked. Boys and
girls, unborn babes and old men will be
brought to the altar of Vengeance and
ritually slaughtered.

President Bush called
his enterprise, a ‘crusade’. This title
invokes in our memory the dour knights
of Aquitaine and the pious Frankish
warriors who took the Cross, and with
the name of Our Lady on their lips,
ventured into a long and hard
pilgrimage. Reality was worse. The
Crusade was a Western Jihad and it
caused a lot of bloodshed. The Crusaders
were wild and unruly, they sacked the
most beautiful Christian city on earth,
Constantinople, and they drenched in
blood the holy ground of Jerusalem. A
Crusader chronicler, Radulf of Caen,
wrote of his comrades-at-arms: in the
Syrian city of Maarra, ‘they impaled
babies on spits, grilled and devoured
them’. They were rough folk, and still I
would like to save the name of these
killers and cannibals from being
besmirched by association with Bush’s
Crusade. They sought glory, not revenge,
this most un-Christian, even
anti-Christian feeling.

The very essence of
the Gospel is the rejection of revenge.
That was the great difference between
the Church and the Synagogue, the two
sisters born two thousand years ago.
This built-in difference is the inherent
feature of the schism between the two
faiths: while Christians are called to
pray for their enemies, Jews are
supposed to dream of vengeance.

II

The Old Biblical
Judaism, Mother-faith of Jews and
Christians, contained two different
interpretations of ‘Messiah’. Both can
be found in the Old Testament. In the
schism between Christians and Jews, each
new faith picked up and made predominant
one of the interpretations. For
Christians, Christ came to save, while
for Jews, the Messiah comes to take
revenge. This is explicated by the
brilliant Israeli scholar, Prof. Israel
Jacob Yuval of the Hebrew University in
his new book, Two Nations In Your
Womb[1].
‘Vengeful salvation’, as Yuval called
it, was derived by the Ashkenazi Jews
from the old Pharisee sources and became
the prevailing doctrine of the
Synagogue.

When Dr Israel Yuval
published his perspicacious book on
theology of vengeance in Judaism, it was
accepted with great enthusiasm by his
Israeli colleagues, but the American
Jewish scholars hated it. Dr Ezra
Fleischer wrote a vehement critique,
concluding it with the words: ‘it
would be better if such a book had not
been published, but since it is
published, it should be sentenced to
oblivion’. [It was published in
English translation only now, in June
2006].

Prof. Yuval quotes
many ancient Jewish texts to support
this point. “In the End of the days
(when the Messiah comes) God will
destroy, kill and exterminate all the
nations but Israelites”, according to
the Sefer Nitzahon Yashan,
written by a German Jew in Thirteenth
Century. A liturgical poet Klonimus b.
Judah had a vision of “God’s hands full
of Goyim’s corpses”.

Even more dreadful
dreams of blood and destruction
precede the first attacks on Jews in
the end of Eleventh Century. A hundred
years before the Crusaders’ onslaught on
Jews, R. Simon b. Yitzhak calls on God
‘to take His sword and slaughter the
Goyim”. In order to hasten their
destruction, the Jewish sages of Europe
adopted new horrible curses against
Christians and Christ, and introduced
them into liturgy of Passover and Yom
Kippur and even into daily prayer, in
addition to the curses embedded there in
the Second Century.

The Messiah of
Vengeance has actually a different name
in Christian theology. He is called the
Antichrist. Christian theologians have
tried to delve in the qualities of this
apocalyptic figure. St John of Damascus
prophesied that the Antichrist will come
to Jews and for Jews, against Christ and
Christians. (John the Damascene was a
friend of Islam and he interpreted the
Muslim dogma of eternal Koran as a form
of the Christian teaching of Logos). The
Church Fathers considered the Rise of
the Antichrist as the rise and temporary
triumph of Judaism. In the Tenth
Century, St Andrew the Byzantine
prophesied that the kingdom of Israel
will be restored and it will be the
launching-pad of the Antichrist. Thus,
Jewish and Christian theologians agree
that their Messiahs are as opposed to
each other as thesis and anti-thesis, or
as Christ and Antichrist.

This proximity of
Israel to the Apocalypse is felt by
millions of devout Christians in the
United States. They have been taught
that the rise of the Antichrist is the
stage before the Second Coming. But,
being misled by their pastors, they draw
a paradoxical conclusion and decide to
side with the Antichrist. They forget
the words, ‘the Son of Man will go as it
has been decreed, but woe to that man’
who sides with the Antichrist.

Jews are not an
Antichrist. But the idea of Vengeful
Messiah is a very dangerous one, and it
should be confronted and argued against.
It could be done by the tools of the
Old, or the New Testament, or with
general humanist concepts. Otherwise,
this idea will poison our discourse.

III

It would be mistake
to attribute the vengefulness of the US
to American Jewry. America is special
for its Jews and Gentiles are
discursively united ‘Judeo-Christians’,
or more precisely, ‘Judeo-Americans’,
for their mores have precious little of
the spirit of Christ. As Karl Marx put
it, “the practical domination of Jewish
spirit over the Christian world has
achieved in North America its
unambiguous, complete expression”.

Many American public
figures, Jews and non-Jews alike, call
for revenge:

There is only one
way to begin to deal with people like
this, and that is you have to kill some
of them even if they are not immediately
directly involved in this thing[2],

said the former
Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger,
who heads the Jewish organisation for
claims to Germany (at $300,000 per
annum).

The response to
this unimaginable 21st-century Pearl
Harbor should be as simple as it is
swift - kill the bastards. A gunshot
between the eyes, blow them to
smithereens, poison them if you have to.
As for cities or countries that host
these worms, bomb them into basketball
courts,

said Steve Donleavy
in the New York Post[3].
In the Washington Post, Rich
Lowry proposed,

If we flatten part
of Damascus or Tehran or whatever it
takes, that is part of the solution[4]

The best quotable is
Ann Coulter’s, the preferred writer of
the World Jewish Review:

This is no time to
be precious about locating the exact
individuals directly involved in this
particular terrorist attack.... We
should invade their countries, kill
their leaders and convert them to
Christianity (!?). We weren't
punctilious about locating and punishing
only Hitler and his top officers. We
carpet-bombed German cities; we killed
civilians. That's war. And this is war’.

After writing these
words, she was rightly sacked by her
newspaper and taken aboard the
neo-conservative Jewish magazine
Commentary.

This vengeful spirit
of the American press is an aberration
in the Western discourse. If you sift
the literature of the Christian and
Muslim lands, you would discover that
revenge appears rarely as the main
subject of an important book. Nikolai
Gogol wrote a Gothic short story called
The Terrible Revenge, Prosper
Mérimée wrote a novelette Colomba
on Corsican vendetta. C’est tout.
Brits always considered revenge a very
un-English trend, certainly not cricket.
‘Vengeful’ is a negative word in every
Christian and Muslim culture. The Jewish
culture, au contraire, is saturated with
the idea of vengeance, as it draws
straight from the Old Testament, without
the redeeming filter of the New
Testament or the Koran.

We Jews know it
better than anybody. A brilliant
American Jewish journalist, John Sack
noted that in his Eye for an Eye,
a chilling book about horrible revenge
perpetrated by Jews on the German
civilians after WWII. This book tells of
tortures, ‘extra-judicial killings’,
mass poisoning and other horrors. You
are not likely to get this book, as the
Jewish establishment succeeded to
suppress it and keep it out of
bookshops.

Not surprisingly,
Israel promoted vengeance into its daily
policy. Its attacks on Palestinians were
called peulot tagmul, the actions
of vengeance. One of these actions was
perpetrated by (later Prime Minister)
General Ariel Sharon in 14 October 1953,
when he and his soldiers
murdered some sixty peasants, women and
children, in the village of Qibya.
The invasion of Lebanon in 1982, with
its 20,000 murdered Lebanese and
Palestinians, Christians and Muslims,
was an act of revenge for the attempted
assassination of the Israeli ambassador
in London. During the last Intifada,
every act of Israeli terror was called
‘retribution’ or ‘retaliation’ by
Israelis and by the American
Jewish-owned media.

This Jewish
infatuation with vengeance survived the
hazardous crossing of the Atlantic. The
American Jews created Hollywood, and
Hollywood made vengeance its main
subject. In a recent American re-make of
The Three Musketeers, d’Artagnan
is moved by the spirit of vengeance,
though this motif is hardly present in
the book or in French movie. Actually,
it is the bad guy, Mordred, son of Lady
Winter, who nurses dreams of revenge.
But for the new American movie, produced
by a Jewish American, vengeance is a
legitimate feeling. In a way, American
cinema was an expression of the Jewish
collective subconscious, and it was the
main factor in the creation of the
American psyche. From Hollywood,
vengefulness flew all over the earth,
and certainly helped to create the world
we inhabit.

In other words, there
was no need for a Jewish conspiracy. A
grandson of Trier Rabbi, who grew up in
the Church, Karl Marx noticed in the
1840s (!) that America (with or even
without a single ethnic Jew) had become
a state with a “Jewish” spirit, and had
embraced the “Jewish” ideology of greed
and alienation. A Marx’s disciple,
Werner Sombart, came to a similar
conclusion about America’s Jewish
spirit, though in his opinion, America
grew with Jews and was formed by Jews
from its very first steps. The rather
immature America could not withstand the
impact of the Jewish mentality, and she
became a Jewish State, the big sister of
Israel.

This explains the
successes of American Jews: it is just
natural that in the ‘Jewish’ state, real
Jews are more successful. This sudden
rise to glory and riches should not be a
cause for vertigo and self adulation -
other way around. In line with the
reasoning of the great American
philosopher, Immanuel Wallerstein, I
say: material success in our days is a
sign of moral failure. ‘Success’ and
riches are not a sign of God’s
benevolence. Anyway, not of the God who
blessed the poor. A man who succeeds in
the robbers’ gang fails in the eyes of
God. Our world with its starving
millions and over-prosperous minority is
immoral and anti-Christian, as
anti-Christian as the Judeo-American
‘crusade’.

This explanation
allows us to answer the question we
posted previously: does America support
Israel because of the Jewish lobby or
because of the ‘true interest of
American corporations’? The putative
answer is: the Jewish lobby is a
superfluous body supportive of the
Israeli right-wing, while America as a
whole is a grander ‘Jewish’ state with
interests outside the Middle East as
well.

This presumption
explains away a lot of queries. It
explains the incredible 99% vote in
support of Israel. It explains the
Holocaust museums, Holocaust studies and
Holocaust films. It explains the
centrality of Jews in American life, as
now America views world events from a
traditional Jewish position, ‘is it good
for Jews?’

It explains the US
walkout at Durban. G.W Bush did not mind
a quarrel with Europe and Japan and
reneged on the Kyoto treaty. He did not
give a damn about annoying Russia and
China in his unilateral decision to drop
the Strategic Arms Treaty. But here he
heard His Master’s Voice. The haughty
rejection of Africa and Asia, the
insulting dismissal of the Afro-American
community, the rejection of the great
struggle against racism were additional
proofs that the US has become a sister
state to Israel.

Recently, President
Vladimir Putin tried to justify his
onslaught on the Chechens in an
interview with Newsweek[5].
He said the Chechen leaders ‘publicly
called for the extermination of Jews’,
relegating critics of his war to the
ranks of anti-Semites. Now, Chechnya has
no Jews, and Chechen leaders’ opinion on
Jews is irrelevant, if anti-Semitism is
to preserve its original meaning of
‘anti-Jewish prejudice or racism’. In
this form it does not exist anymore, as
we argued elsewhere[6],
but the word now has a new meaning. It
has become the equivalent of
‘anti-Americanism’ of McCarthy’s days,
or of ‘anti-Soviet’ in Brezhnev’s Soviet
Union.

Americans tense and
shriek whenever they feel their loyalty
to Jews questioned. Whoever rejects the
new American paradigm, in America or
elsewhere, is an anti-Semite by
definition. That is why good persons of
Jewish origin, - whether Noam Chomsky or
Woody Allen, St Paul or Karl Marx - are
called ‘anti-Semites’. They are usually
rejected by the Jewish community, but
their names are used to defend the
structure they attacked.

An offence to the
Jewish community is not considered a
form of racism, as ordinary racism is
tolerated with great ease, especially if
it is directed towards Arabs (new
enemies of Jews) or Blacks (old enemies
of Jews). It is treated as a ‘lese
majesté’; in the years of Jewish
ascendancy in the Soviet Union (1917 –
1937), people were shot for an
anti-Jewish remark. Manfred Stricker of
Strasbourg campaigned to name the local
university after Dr Schweitzer, while
the Jewish community preferred the name
of a Jewish scholar with a loose
connection to the city. As the result,
Manfred Stricker was sentenced to six
months’ jail. Alexander Chancellor wrote
in the Guardian (under a promising title
It is not Black and White) of the
assassinated Dutch right-winger: yes, he
was an enemy of Islam, but he was good
to Jews, and therefore, not bad a guy.

Speaking to students
in Harvard, Emory and other Ivy League
universities, I noticed that they do not
know the name ‘Arnold Toynbee’. The
greatest British philosopher of history
of the Twentieth Century made an error:
he spoke of the tragedy of the
Palestinians. He also cited African
slavery as a tragedy on a par with the
Jewish holocaust. As a result, he was
erased and disappeared from American
consciousness. It is but impossible to
find non-fiction by G. K. Chesterton in
American or English bookshops. This
brilliant essayist is relegated to
almost non-existent ‘Christian sections’
of bookshops, and his rare reprints are
sandwiched between Bad Popes and
Rabbi Jesus.

This influence in
public discourse explains the obedience
of American (and European)
intellectuals. In the Judeo-American
state, the Jews form its ‘Church’, its
ideological establishment. For an
intellectual, it is better to be called
a paedophile than an anti-Semite.

IV

Though the US has
become a Judeo-Christian state, the
question of Who Rules Whom in the
ménage a trois of Jews, Israel and
the US is not a simple one. The three
dramatispersonae form a
triangle as mysterious as that of
Bermuda and certainly no less perilous.
Half a year ago, some dubious sources
reported Sharon saying at a cabinet
meeting: ‘Do not worry about the US, it
is under our control’. The words were
denied, but as the uprising in Palestine
swiftly glides into a Joshua-style
extermination campaign, while the US
‘supports the war against terrorism’,
the doubts grow.

The very existence of
a corporate entity known as "the Jewish
People" (or, Jewry, or The Jews) is
frequently denied. Some two hundred
years ago Jewry existed as unambiguously
as France or the Church. Our ancestors
were members of this extra-territorial
state, an authoritarian semi-criminal
order, run by rich men and Rabbis. Its
leadership, called Kahal (Hebrew for
Community) made the important decisions,
and ordinary Jews followed their
directions. The leadership could dispose
with life and property of Jews, just
like any feudal ruler. There was no
freedom of opinion within the walls of
the ghetto. A rebellious Jew could be
punished by death. Came Emancipation,
and the power of the Kahal was broken
from inside and outside. The Jews were
set free and became citizens of their
respective countries.

Nowadays, a new
generation of Jews has emerged that does
not know of Joseph. Years of apologetic
brainwashing made them forget why our
grandfathers wanted to break the iron
walls of the Jewish community. The
notion of Jewry has become a moot point.
Are we, the descendents of Jews,
citizens of our countries, or are we
citizens of the Jewish People? Does
‘Jewry’ exist, in the same way any state
exists, or it is just a figure of
speech?

Here is a paradox:
the Jewish leaders want Jewry to be a
sort of Stealth jet, now you see it, now
you don’t. It is here to strafe, it is
nowhere for flak. They say: ‘That’s what
Hitler said’ or ‘That was invented by
the writers of the forgery, the
Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, and
they forget to say that it is written
into Israel’s Declaration of
Independence as well. Israel actually is
described as ‘the State of the Jewish
People’, and that is why it attracts
disproportionate attention and influence
as the visible (and territorially bound)
part of Jewry. That is why an
ambassadorial position in Tel Aviv is
considered among the highest and most
desirable for a career diplomat. The
concept of ‘the Jewish People’ received
a singular recognition in international
law, when the Jewish People were
declared in 1950 and in 1991 by modern
Germany to be the residual heir of
intestate Jews. The Israeli Criminal Law
allows the state of Israel to judge and
prosecute any person on the globe who
acted against a person, health, life,
property or dignity of a Jew, even if
this Jew has no connection whatsoever
with the state of Israel.

We, children of
emancipated Jewish parents, are as
surprised as anybody. Nothing prepared
us for the miraculous recovery of Jewry.
Just recently it was on its way out,
indeed, proclaimed dead; and we had come
to consider ourselves free men. Within
our lifetime, things have changed
drastically, and now we are being called
upon to declare allegiance to this body,
or suffer ostracism and humiliation,
probably loss of livelihood, or worse.
Jewry (please do not confuse this term
with the millions of descendents of
medieval Jews) has regained its place in
world politics, and taken over the mind
of the only superpower, the US.

Isaac Deutscher, a
Jewish Marxist and a biographer of
Trotsky, was among the first Jews to
notice this phenomenon. He proposed in
his essay Who is a Jew (published
in the Jewish Quarterly, London 1966) to
distinguish between ‘Jews’ and ‘Jewry’.
While Jews are individuals of various
opinions and ways of life, Jewry is a
quasi-national body with its own
leadership and agenda. In his opinion,
Jewry was on its way to disappearance,
but from the ashes of the World War Two
‘the phoenix of Jewry has risen’. ‘I
would have preferred Jews to survive and
Jewry to perish’, he wrote, but “the
extermination of Jews gave a new lease
of life to Jewry”.

The self-appointed
leadership of revived Jewry achieved the
pinnacle of power in close liaison with
super-rich Mammon-worshippers. They are
intoxicated by their clout and by the
lack of opposition. They support the war
criminal Sharon, but they consider him
too weak. They booed Paul Wolfowitz, the
Jewish American super-hawk. Every
Israeli politician knows and heeds:
there are powerful Jews in America and
elsewhere who want endless war in
Palestine. They understand the salvation
brought by the armies of Russia and
America in the World War Two as their
personal victory over the Gentile world,
as a sign of a new era of Jewry’s
world-wide supremacy, promised in Talmud
and Cabbala teachings.

Isaac Deutscher
ascribed the changes in Israel to their
influence:

A wealthy American
Jew, a ‘worldly businessman’ among his
gentile associates and friends in New
York, Philadelphia or Detroit, is at
heart proud to be a member of the Chosen
People, and in Israel he exercises his
influence in favour of religious
obscurantism and reaction. He keeps
alive the spirit of racial-talmudic
exclusiveness and superiority. It feeds
and inflames the antagonism towards the
Arabs[7]”.

It would be odd if
this ‘wealthy Jew’ would influence only
distant Israel. His influence is even
stronger in his country, in the US,
where he promotes the same idea “of
racial-talmudic exclusiveness and
superiority”, in full harmony with the
‘Jewish’ spirit of America.

These rich men do not
need Palestinian land. They are not
going to migrate to Israel and work on
its vineyards. They use Israel and its
people as their dispensable tool in the
world-wide game. They misunderstand the
Gentiles’ compassion as a sign of
weakness. They misunderstand their
friendliness as their submission. Like a
cat with a mouse, they played with the
Church of Nativity to check when
Christendom is finally dead, if it will
cease to respond. At the same time, they
threaten the Mosques of Jerusalem and
train American cruise missiles on
Baghdad. Instead of Christianity and
Judaism, they bring in a new faith: they
supplant the Crucifixion by the
Holocaust, and the Resurrection by the
creation of the State of Israel. For
them, Jewish control over the holy sites
of Christendom and Islam is a visual
proof of their dominance. Their
destruction would be a sign of total
victory. In a way, they are right: a
society without its sacral values is
doomed to extinction.

Many Jews and
descendents of Jews feel threatened by
the concept of Jewry. They usually
object to ‘generalities’, to ‘accusation
of the whole people’ or
‘hate-mongering’. At first, I was taken
aback by their response. Afterwards, I
thought that their reasoning is so good
that it could be used by others as well.
Pity to waste a good thing. For
instance,

- How do you dare
say the Americans nuked Hiroshima? I am
an American, and I did not nuke
Hiroshima.

- You say, ‘the
English ruled India’. What nonsense! I
know hundreds of poor English workers
who did not rule India.

- You call for the
liberation of Algeria. This is
anti-Frenchism! The real difference is
not between the French and native
Algerians, but between cultured people
and Muslim fanatics.

- ‘Russian
imperialist policy’? This is a racist
remark designed to cause hatred of
Russians.

Probably you will
admit that this sounds silly. Policies
are devised by the elites, carried out
by the more-or-less willing majority,
and the outsiders suffer the
consequences. Jewry is not different
from any other state or trans-national
corporation. The Jewish leadership has
policies, and is able to change them.
Naturally, ordinary Jews can submit to
or reject them.

VI

This is not much like
classified information, but you should
not say it out loud. The Jewish
establishment can tell Bush to say
‘uncle’ and he will. This is a
Polichinelle secret, as the French say.
The rest of the world, from the Far East
to Northern Europe, knows it full well,
and from time to time a reckless prime
minister or a speaker of a parliament
babbles about it. The US Congress always
rises to the occasion and sends its
strong protest to the babbling offender,
like a henpecked husband who never would
admit his fear of wife’s anger in front
of beer buddies.

You can say the US is
run by Africans, Wasps, Freemasons or
Grey Aliens, and you will get no
response. You may say that the land is
regulated by the Corporations, Standard
Oil and Boeing, and nobody will object.
But just try to say “the Jews run the
US” and you will find yourself in a
serious trouble. Now, what is actually
the position of the Jews in the US?

It can be described
in many ways. They represent the Church
(i.e. ideological apparatus) of the new
Judeo-American faith. They are the
Brahmin caste of America. They can be
called even a very prominent, if not
ruling ethnic minority. This turn of
events is strange but not unique. Until
recent times, England was run by a small
caste of Eton graduates, as exclusivist
as any Jew; they even married within
their own group.

That is why Powell
and Bush can’t and won’t give orders to
Sharon. They have some free play, so
long as the Jewish People are of two
minds, - before this unique entity has
not decided what it wants. Now,
apparently the Jews (as opposed to Jews)
are united by a common will, single
purpose and a feeling of power.
Intoxication by power and unity has
caused this cautious people to drop
masks, to cease pretence. The new
openness provides us with an
unprecedented insight into the soul of
the Jews and their Mammonite supporters.

An authentic voice,
Ron Grossman of the Chicago Tribune[8]
writes, “As a self-proclaimed humanist,
I ought to recoil in horror from the
thought of tanks rumbling through a
city, anybody's city. My head should
hang in sorrow at televised images of
street fighting (rather, massacres -
ISH) in Bethlehem and Ramallah. But here
is a hint: Don't lecture or preach to
us. Forget about appealing to our better
selves”.

Yes, forget about
appealing to their better selves, for
they have not got one. ‘The better
selves’ were just a device, and now
their real selves have emerged in all
their brutal might.

VII

Let us turn this text
into a movie script and alternate a few
snapshots provided by the BBC from the
field. In Palestine, UNRWA chief
Peter Hansen said: "We are getting
reports of pure horror. Helicopters are
strafing civilian residential areas;
systematic shelling by tanks has created
hundreds of wounded; bulldozers are
razing refugee homes and food and
medicine will soon run out." Dozens of
dead bodies are lying in the streets of
Jenin refugee camp. The Church of
Nativity is on fire, as in 614.

Meanwhile, tens of
thousands of Jews turn up in New York
to show support for Israel’s massacre of
Palestinians. 150,000 Jewish
demonstrators take to the streets of
Paris to express their solidarity
with Israel. Waving Israeli flags and
draped in the blue and white colours of
their national banner (the
tricolour is dropped and forgotten),
protesters marched from the Place de la
Republique to the Place de la Bastille
in Paris, chanting in French and Hebrew
and carrying signs that read "Yesterday
New York, today Jerusalem, tomorrow
Paris.”

In Israel,
“no one can express the aspirations of
most Israelis like the prime minister.
This is not a war that was waged by
Sharon, the "warmonger," this is the war
of all of us”, writes Gideon Levy, a man
of heart and conscience. “It will also
be very difficult to blame Sharon for
the consequences of the war, in the
light of the sweeping support he has
been given by the majority of Israelis.
Nearly 30,000 men were mobilized and
they reported for duty as one man,
making the refusal movement, with 21
refuseniks currently in jail,
irrelevant. "We didn't ask why, we just
came," the reservists told the Prime
Minister, expressing the "together"
syndrome that characterizes Israel at
such times. Tens of thousands of men
leave their homes, putting their normal
life behind them, and set out to kill
and be killed - and they don't even ask
why? That is the behaviour of the herd”,
concludes Levy.

Levy is mistaken: it
is the real strength of Jewry that comes
through in this immense cohesiveness and
unabashed ethnocentrism. For instance, a
Mark Steyn (sic) writes in the
National Post. ”All civilized people
can agree that killing Jews is
wrong”. (Not ‘killing’ is wrong, as then
it would be wrong to kill Palestinians.
Only ‘killing Jews’ is wrong. This
approach is based on the Jewish reading
of the Ten Commandments: ‘Thou shalt not
murder a Jew’, instead of the Christian
‘Thou shalt not murder’.

Professor David D.
Perlmutter writes in LA Times[9]:
“I daydream--if only! If in 1948, 1956,
1967 or 1973 Israel had acted just a bit
like the Third Reich, then today
Israelis would shop, eat pizza, marry
and celebrate the holy days unmolested.
And of course Jews, not sheiks, would
have that Gulf oil’. Such daydreamers
should be carefully removed from the
education system, for being
unreconstructed Nazis. But no fear!
Judeo-Nazism is a winning ideology in
the US.

Witty if snobbish
Taki of the British weekly Spectator
contributed the following anecdotal
evidence of the new Jewish vehemence and
single-mindedness: “On Easter Sunday,
during lunch, the richest woman in
Israel, Irit Lando[10],
suddenly burst into my house and began
to harangue my friends and family about
Adam Shapiro. Despite the fact she's one
of my wife's oldest friends and was
invited to drop in after lunch, I was
extremely annoyed. I reminded Irit that
my house was not Israeli occupied
territory; that it was Easter; and
knowing how I feel about the plight of
the Palestinians, she should change the
subject. Which she did, turning on the
press, instead, and how they gave
publicity to that godawful traitor Adam
Shapiro”.

As a few mavericks of
Jewish origin like Adam Shapiro are
increasingly marginalized, the Jews
en masse rally to support Sharon and
Israel. The US officials have no choice
but to take the hint. American Gentiles
figured it out long time ago: if you
want to make a career in politics or the
media, you have to support the Jews
wholeheartedly. Otherwise you will find
yourself thrown to dogs. If a man has
found his way to the higher echelons of
American power, then he has learned the
ropes and knows the limits of his power.

VIII

Eric Alterman of the
Nation published a list of American
pundits unreservedly supportive of
Israel. It is an exciting read:

COLUMNISTS AND COMMENTATORS WHO CAN BE
COUNTED UPON TO SUPPORT ISRAEL
REFLEXIVELY AND WITHOUT QUALIFICATION:

George Will, The Washington Post,
Newsweek and ABC News William Safire,
The New York Times A.M. Rosenthal, The
New York Daily News, formerly Executive
Editor of and later columnist for, The
New York Times, Charles Krauthammer, The
Washington Post, PBS, Time, and The
Weekly Standard, formerly of the New
Republic. Michael Kelly, The Washington
Post, The Atlantic Monthly, National
Journal, and MSNBC.com, formerly of The
New Republic and The New Yorker. Lally
Weymouth, The Washington Post and
Newsweek Martin Peretz, The New
Republic, Daniel Pipes, The New York
Post Andrea Peyser, The New York Post
Dick Morris, The New York Post Lawrence
Kaplan, The New Republic William
Bennett, CNN William Kristol, The
Washington Post, the Weekly Standard,
Fox News, formerly of ABC News Robert
Kagan, The Washington Post and The
Weekly Standard, Mortimer Zuckerman, US
News and World Report (Zuckerman is also
Chairman of Conference of Presidents of
Major American Jewish Organizations ).
David Gelertner, The Weekly Standard
John Podhoretz, The New York Post and
The Weekly Standard Mona Charen, The
Washington Times Morton Kondracke, Roll
Call, Fox News formerly of The
McLaughlin Group, The New Republic and
PBS Fred Barnes, The Weekly Standard,
Fox News, formerly of The New Republic,
The McLaughlin Group, and The Baltimore
Sun Sid Zion, The New York Post, The New
York Daily News, Yossi Klein Halevi The
New Republic, Sidney Zion, The New York
Post, formerly of The New York Daily
News Norman Podhoretz, Commentary, Jonah
Goldberg, National Review and CNN Laura
Ingram, CNN, formerly of MSNBC and CBS
News Jeff Jacoby, The Boston Globe Rich
Lowry, National Review Andrew Sullivan,
The New Republic Seth Lipsky, The Wall
Street Journal and The New York Sun,
formerly of the Jewish Forward Irving
Kristol, The Public Interest, The
National Interest and The Wall Street
Journal Editorial Page Chris Matthews,
MSNBC Allan Keyes, MSNBC,
WorldNetDaily.com Brit Hume, Fox News
John Leo, US News and World Report
Robert Bartley, The Wall Street Journal
Editorial Page John Fund, The Wall
Street Journal Opinion Journal, formerly
of The Wall Street Journal Editorial
Page Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street
Journal Editorial Page, Ben Wattenberg,
The Washington Times, PBS Tony Snow,
Washington Times and Fox News Lawrence
Kudlow, National Review and CNBC Alan
Dershowitz, Boston Herald, Washington
Times David Horowitz, Frontpage.com
Jacob Heilbrun, The Los Angeles Times
Thomas Sowell, Washington Times Frank
Gaffney Jr, Washington Times Emmett
Tyrell, American Spectator and New York
Sun Cal Thomas, Washington Times Oliver
North, Washington Times and Fox News,
formerly of MSNBC Michael Ledeen, Jewish
World Review William F. Buckley,
National Review Bill O'Reilly, Fox News
Paul Greenberg, Arkansas
Democrat-Gazette, L. Brent Bozell,
Washington Times Todd Lindberg,
Washington Times Michael Barone, US News
and World Report and The McLaughlin
Group Ann Coulter, Human Events, Linda
Chavez, Creators Syndicate Cathy Young,
Reason Magazine Uri Dan, New York Post
Dr. Laura Schlessinger, morality maven
Rush Limbaugh, radio host.

“What is perhaps most
interesting is the long list of non-Jews
who support Israel reflexively and
without qualification”, - wrote
Professor Kevin McDonald of California
State University[11].
– “Unconditional support for Israel is a
critical litmus test of acceptability by
the major media in the U.S. Prospective
pundits “earn their stripes” by showing
their devotion to Israel (and,
presumably other Jewish issues). It
seems difficult to explain the huge tilt
toward Israel in the absence of some
enormous selective factor as the result
of individual attitudes. And there is
the obvious suggestion that while the
Jews on this list must be seen as ethnic
actors, the non-Jews are certainly
making an excellent career move in
taking the positions they do. This
litmus test for prospective opinion
makers is further supported by the fact
that Joe Sobran was fired from the
National Review because he had the
temerity to suppose that the U.S.
foreign policy should not be dictated by
what’s best for Israel”.

The careerists were
chosen for their ability to disregard
the interests of the American people. A
good indicator of elite composition and
behaviour can be found in the figures of
student-admission figures of the Ivy
League universities. The share of the
traditional elites of the US, the WASPs,
has shrunk from 85% to 35%, while the
Jews’ share (2% of population) has
reached 40%. In other words, a non-Jew’s
chance of finding a place among the
elite has decreased significantly.

Thus, after many
years of selection process, pro-Jewish
forces have risen to positions of power
and influence in the US.
All this said, America was almost doomed
to become a Neo-Jewish state by virtue
of its ideology. Anthony Judge wrote, “There
is an extraordinary parallel between the
unusual exclusivist perception of
America as ‘God's own country’, and of
Israel as a gift by God to "Chosen
People". Why have these perceptions
justified encroachment on the lands of
others, the displacement and death of
the indigenous populations, their
restrictions to ‘reservations’, and the
development of a strategic framework for
the expansion of "western civilization"
into the spaces of other cultures?”

The Fathers Pilgrims,
the founders of America, called
themselves a New Israel. However, Satan
played a cruel game with their WASP
descendants. He promised to make them
new Jews, and he made his promise good.
However, they became a minor partner in
the Judeo-Mammonite alliance, doomed to
swear their allegiance each day.

IX

Still, Professor
McDonald is mistaken in oversimplifying
the reasons of the Gentile support for
the Jews. Apart from Bush and Ramsfield,
apart from the careerists, there are
good non-Jews who support the Jews, just
as there are maverick Jews and
‘non-Jewish Jews’, by definition of
Isaac Deutscher. This is due to the
contradictory nature of the centrifugal
and centripetal tendencies within the
Jewish community. By their individual
responses to encounters with the
non-Jews, the Jews can be classified as
Rim Jews or Core Jews. Rim Jews try to
leave the community by marrying out, by
adopting Christianity, Communism or
other faiths, by seeking communion with
God. Core Jews proclaim the primacy of
the community in permanent warfare
against the Goyim. In the millennia-old
tug-of-war, Christendom tries to undo
the Core, while Jewry tries to undo the
Rim.

That is why there are
two kinds of ‘philo-Semites’. One of
them, the good Gentiles, look to a new
spiritual home. They are influenced by
the positive parts of the Bible, by
‘love thy neighbour’. They like the
spirit of community, of belonging, of
the tradition that Jews exude. They like
a light touch of ‘outsider’ that
attracts poetic natures. There are many
people, who want to break the tiresome
strangling ties of their immediate
surroundings. James Joyce, the Irish
writer, saw the Jews as a way out of the
bloody feud with Brits. Marina
Tsvetaeva, the Russian poetess, felt
herself an outsider in her steady
middle-class family, and wrote, ‘in this
most Christian world, all poets are
Jews’. The charming female characters of
Woody Allen’s early comedies are
attracted to this eternal foreigner, the
Jew.

It is not a
coincidence that such people usually
meet with marginal Jews on the outer rim
of the Jewish community. The Jew of
Joyce was the Italian Jewish writer
Italo Svevo, the Jew of Tsvetaeva was
the Russian Communist spy Sergey Ephron.
The Jew of Diane Keaton and Mia Farrow
was this amusing outsider, Woody Allen.
As the rim of the Jewish community is
quite large, there always is
intermingling with the better sort of
Gentile mavericks.

The second set of
allies consists of the hard businessmen
who appreciate the practical side of
Jewish ideology. They like the idea of
the Mob, the pursuit of money, the
disregard of morals and of social
consequences thereof, of others’
property and very life. People who see
everybody as an enemy, and life as
eternal warfare, notice that in Jewish
ideology, no stranger is a ‘neighbour’.
That is why the cruellest rulers,
princes and kings were those who took
Jewish advisers and ministers. They
learned from them how to disregard their
subjects. Such people as Nero and Pedro
the Cruel, Conrad Black and Margaret
Thatcher, the Mafia Godfathers and Third
World dictators loved the Core (as
opposed to Rim) Jews.

Thus, good people
have their Jews, and bad people have
their Jews. There is a problem: the Jews
of good people are the outsiders, who
hardly qualify as Jews, while the Jews
of bad people are the powerful Jewish
leaders. And the Jewish fraternity is a
structurally hierarchical body, strongly
influenced by its authoritarian
leadership. Unwillingly, the good Jews
were used by the bad Jews. Albert
Einstein rejected the Jewish community,
disproved of Zionism, never went to a
synagogue and was a charming man. But
his achievements were used by bad Jews
to promote their own concept.

It happened because
not too many people dare to understand:
the Jews are neither a people, nor a
religion, nor a race. They are a
quasi-religious organisation; a likeness
of the Catholic Church bundled together
with the IMF like browser and mailer are
bundled in the Windows. One can find all
sorts of Catholics, but decisions are
made in Rome. One can find all sorts of
Jews, but the decisions are made in Wall
Street.

While fighting
against the Core, it is important to
support the Rim. That was the
traditional approach of the Christian
Church: fight Jewry for the soul of
Jews. A Jewish Zealot, ‘Mad’ Goldhagen,
claimed in his books that the Church was
‘anti-Semitic’ and its policies led to
the Jewish holocaust. Nothing could be
more wrong: the Church wished to correct
the mind, not to kill the body. Indeed,
the true interests of Jews and the Jews
are at loggerheads.

The Jewish elites
know that people should be given a
choice, and they try to ensure that it
will be the wrong choice. That is why
the Mammonite Jews support the Zionist
Zealots. They want us, Jews, to make our
choice between these two evils, the
Zealots and Mammonites. But there is
‘the third philosophy’ as well. Its
adepts believe in the great fraternity
of mankind, and they reject both the
Zealots’ hate and the Pharisees’ drive
for the world domination. They can
adhere to different political and
religious schools, be on the left or on
the right of the political map, believe
in Christ or Allah, Lenin or Chomsky,
the New Age or Buddha, Art or Love. They
are the remnant of Israel, proclaimed by
St Paul. In their merging with mankind,
the words of Christ will be fulfilled: a
corn that dies, lives. A corn that
lives, dies.

The story of the
Death and the Resurrection has this
mystic meaning: do not be afraid of
death and disappearance, as it is the
way to life. The Jews who died as Jews
remained alive. After the curtain
descended on the Jewish community in
Spain; St Teresa of Avila and St John of
God died as Jews and remained alive
forever. The names of exiles who went to
Amsterdam and Morocco are gone and
forgotten: they remained alive as Jews,
then died forever. It was repeated in
1917 in Russia: that those who remained
Jews died forever; those who embraced
the revolution live forever.

XIII

Just before 9/11, a
group of US congressmen visited
Palestine, and one of them made
headlines. It was the Congresswoman
Shelley Berkley (a Democrat from Nevada)
who said to the Palestinian Minister
Saeb Erakat: “This is our country; we
won the war. If the Palestinians do not
like living under Jewish rule, I would
not prevent them from leaving”.

Who are the Hon.
Shelley Berkley’s ‘we’? She certainly
did not mean ‘we the Americans’, or ‘we
the Nevadans’ who sent her to
Washington. Nevada did not wage a war in
the Middle East, to the best of my
knowledge. Some naïve person would
probably reply ‘Israel’, and even accuse
her of ‘dual loyalty’. Strict mentors
would censure her for betraying the
trust of her electorate by switching her
allegiance to a foreign country. But it
would be a dishonest misinterpretation.
Miss Berkley never switched allegiance.
Together with many other members of
Congress and the Senate, she has a
single loyalty, which is to the Jewish
cause.

Miss Berkley makes
sense. If Nevadans and other Americans
do not mind living under heavy Jewish
influence, why should the Palestinians
mind it? Americans apparently do not
mind that their wealth is managed by big
investment bankers, under the umbrella
of Mr Greenspan’s Federal Reserve. Jesus
saves, but Moses invests. Jewish
influence does not stop where the buck
stops. The ideals of Americans are
formed by Hollywood with its cult of
greed and success. Their thoughts are
supplied by the Jewish pundits in the
universities and media. For comfort,
they take the New York Times
chicken soup. Their history has shrunk
down to Holocaust studies. Their books
are written by Bellow and Malamud.
Americans do not mind that their
politics are in the hands of people
whose single devotion is to the Jewish
cause.

If they do not mind,
why do I, an Israeli Jew, mind it,
instead of feeling pride for this great
achievement of my brethren the American
Jews? After all, it is no mean feat to
take over the only superpower without a
single shot being fired. This is not a
rhetorical question, it has an answer,
and it is not ‘self-hatred’. I feel
perfectly comfortable with myself, and
with the majority of Jews I meet.
Separately, we are nice and cuddly.
Well, as nice as any. But together, we
form a formidable and repulsive social
machine, hell-bent on power grasping and
greed. I like ‘the Jews’ as much as the
great American Henry Thoreau loved the
American Empire, as Voltaire loved his
Catholic Church, as Orwell loved
Stalin’s Party.

Jewry has become the
adversary of Jews in Israel: Israelis
who would like to live in peace with
their Palestinian neighbours, in peace
with churches and mosques, can not
counteract the raw muscle of the
American Jewish leadership. Good
Israelis and their Palestinian allies
can’t win, unless this power is
contained. In a Nordic story, the
hero-god Thor came to Utgard to prove
his power. The gods of Utgard challenged
him to drink from a horn. He tried and
failed: The horn was connected to a
well. Only by severing the connection,
could he meet the challenge. If you, my
readers overseas, will block the sea of
the Jewish support abroad, we, Israelis
and Palestinians, will be able to change
things on the ground. The supporters of
the Jewish state in your midst should be
contained, for your and our sake.

X

A few months ago, my
travels took me to the Amazon basin, to
the Peruvian jungle deeply cut by Rio
del Madre de Dios. In this remote
location, small rivulets meander for
miles among endless forests, navigable
just by small pirogues. After a long
sailing from Puerto Maldonado, my native
guide brought me to the Lost World of
many-coloured parrots and of friendly
monkeys that sat on my shoulder. On a
narrow path, I noticed a huge tree. It
was bigger than all other trees of the
jungle. Its huge roots were spread
across many yards. It is the
telegraph-tree, my guide replied to my
query. He tapped on the trunk of the
monster tree and the sound boomed
throughout the jungle. The giant was
hollow.

I looked at it
closely and noticed a strange feature I
had missed before: some seven yards
above the ground, another trunk, a
partly digested palm tree, protruded
from the embracing, smooth bark. The
telegraph-tree was a monstrous parasite,
a growth on a palm tree. The parasite
had no trunk of its own, but it
enveloped the tree and grew on it,
eventually blocking it and digesting its
life juices. The tree rotted inside its
shell, and the hollow trunk climbed to
new heights, creating a perfect drum for
the local Indians.

It was a living image
of the United States of America, this
huge and hollow trunk, towering above
the forest of nations, but dead inside.
The American Empire has entered its
period of decline. The dollar is still
the world currency, the American army is
still the formidable war machine, the
stock market still runs to trillions,
but the great state of the West is a
spiritual nonentity. Political life in
the US has entered the twilight
reminiscent of the last days of the
Meroving kings. For an outsider, it is
hard to comprehend that this nation of
275 million could not find better
leaders than the two nincompoops Bush
and/or Gore. Both appear to be weak of
mind, lacking in basic knowledge, and
totally devoid of political will.
Probably an average city could field
better men than these two.

General political
decline is accompanied by weakness of
mind. America of the mass media and
public life is silly. There are no
important new books, comparable with the
pre-war American output. The US TV is an
insult to human intelligence. Museums
are full of rusty junk and videotapes
purporting to be American art. The
Judeo-Mammonite takeover has eliminated
the living forces of America, and
directed them into consumption.

XI

The ‘Jewish’ spirit
of America, denounced by Marx, was
glorified and exalted by a Jewish
American journalist Phillip Weiss[12]:

No one is allowed
to speak up about something we all
quietly know: Jews changed America. The
civil rights movement reflects Jewish
values of justice. Feminism is a
reflection of liberal Jewish matriarchal
values. Ever-more-powerful Jews in the
media have ushered in the information
age. Psychologically attuned Jews and
Hollywood Jews changed the language of
popular culture—Seinfeld, Weinstein. And
the new emphasis on educational
achievement throughout our society
reflects the Jewish love of learning. I
have not even gotten to finance or the
law… These trends have made America a
fairer and more creative place. Jews
have fostered the separation of church
and state. The greatly diminished
influence of church on public mores
wouldn’t have happened without
secularized Jews gaining cultural power.
And no one ever talks about it. The most
important change in establishment
culture in the last 25 years, and it
goes unspoken.

This smug
self-adoration of Weiss calls for some
sobriety. These changes can be seen in a
less felicitous light. Jews changed
America during last 25-30 years, says
Weiss. These were golden years for
American Jews, as their share of power
and influence grew. But these years were
rather bad for un-Chosen Americans. A
British weekly, the Economist, an ardent
supporter of the neo-liberalism,
reported[13]
recently:

The gap between
the poor and the rich is rising. In
America, in last twenty years, average
income of the richest fifth of
population from 9 to 15 times income of
the poorest fifth. In 1999, British
income inequality reached its widest
level in 40 years.

The growth of Jewish
influence was accompanied by divergence:
the rich became richer, the poor became
poorer, and the middle class lost. It
should have been expected, as
traditionally the prosperity of the
Jewish community runs counter to the
interests of common folk. The Bible
provided us with an archetypal story of
Joseph and his brothers, who prospered
by enslaving ordinary Egyptians to the
Pharaoh. The Jewish community stood by
the king and against the ordinary folk
in Spain in the days of Don Pedro the
Cruel, in Poland and Ukraine of 17th
century. Not in vain Jewish
neighbourhoods were located next to
royal palaces everywhere in Europe.

The
‘ever-more-powerful Jews in the media’
were engaged in their usual drivel:
glorifying Israel, bemoaning the Jewish
Holocaust, supporting every nasty case
from mass murder in Iraq to the blocking
of the Blacks’ advancement in the US.
Under the Jews, Hollywood made American
cinema even more violent, moralistic,
repulsive, and philistine. There is a
good Jewish guy in the movies, Woody
Allen, but he is not in Hollywood and he
is anyway considered an anti-Semite. In
the law, the advent of the Jew did not
make America a more just society, but a
more litigious one. ‘A Jewish lawyer’
has come to stay as the bogeyman for
scaring kids at night. ‘Separation of
church and society’ can be considered to
be its forced de-Christianisation and
de-spiritualization.

XII

The US has become a
Jewish state in more ways than one. It
has the same security checks, the same
holocaust museums, the same poverty for
many and riches for a few as Israel. The
similarity is felt by its friend and foe
alike. David Quinn[14]
wrote in the Sunday Times, that the feel
of Irish intellectuals’ rejection of
American policies is “so strong, so
palpable, so irrational (!?), that it
reminded me of nothing so much as
anti-Semitism”. Quinn continued:

Americans are like
the Jews in having become the scapegoats
of choice for half the planet. The Jews
were accused of controlling the world's
finances; so is the United States. The
Jews were accused of promoting decadence
through their control of culture and the
arts. So is the United States. The Jews
were accused of putting their power to a
range of nefarious uses. So is the
United States”.

“Given America's
power and wealth, and the strength of
its Jewish lobby, in the Middle East it
has been simplicity itself to mix
anti-American with age-old anti-Semitism
to produce a truly poisonous brew. Tens
of millions of people have imbibed this
concoction and are now filled with a
hatred of America as strong as that of
many Germans in the Weimar Republic.

“Osama bin Laden
and his followers have followed their
hatred to its logical conclusion, just
as Hitler did: If America really is to
blame for the world's problems, then it,
and its people, must be eradicated”.

This article is
important, as it displays the
subconscious of an adept of
Judeo-Americanism. Quinn appeals to Jews
and Neo-Jews: support America as America
is a Jewish state that carries out
Jewish policies and causes normal
anti-Jewish response. Quinn considers
Jews and America to be identical, and he
uses the many cliché of Neo-Jewish
propaganda.

One of the clichés is
that rejection of Jewish/American
policies is ‘irrational’ for there is a
tenet of faith: “thou shall not try and
understand why thine policies cause
rejection”. Elie Wiesel, the prophet of
holocaustism, recites at every occasion:
‘totally irrational… no explanation… no
reason, just pure hate of everybody to
Jews’, and Rabbi Tony Bayfield repeats
it with usual Jewish vehemence[15]:

I am seething with
rage at anyone who dares suggest that,
in any way, such acts (attack on
Pentagon etc) are even explicable, let
alone justifiable.

Without knowing Rabbi
Bayfield personally, I venture a wild
guess. If you mention Deir Yassin to
him, or the genocide in Iraq, he will
seethe with rage: How can one compare!
He will find these mass murders
justifiable, let certainly explicable.
But whenever Jews suffer, it can not be
explained and understood but by some
mystic means.

Quinn, as any
Neo-Jewish apologist, denies the
undeniable. For him, America does not
control world finances, she is
accused of it. Probably, America is
only accused of occupying a large
part of North America. In Quinn’s mind,
she lives in a poor house, in a little
schtetl. I have no idea of David
Quinn’s origin, but nobody can be more
Jewish than he.

For Quinn, every
enemy of Jewish supremacy/American
domination is a new Hitler who wants to
kill all Jews/Americans. Nasser was
Hitler when he nationalized Suez, Arafat
was Hitler and Beirut was his bunker.
Soviet Russia was the same as Nazi
Germany from the moment Moscow completed
its part in vanquishing Hitler. Osama
bin Laden, or ‘tens of millions of
people in the Middle East’ became a new
Hitler. The idea behind this comparison
is that these ‘tens of millions’ of
Muslims should be dealt with as Hitler
and his ‘many Germans in the Weimar
Republic’.

Judeo-American
discourse inherited this demonisation
idea from its Jewish predecessor.
Introduction of fury, hatred and
vengefulness into a discussion of the
adversary is a potent traditional Jewish
ideological weapon. It is never turned
on inside the community, but used
outside of it. Demonisation and fury
causes general nastiness and bias in
discourse and eventually destroys
society. Rabbi Shmuel Boteach, formerly
the Chabad Rabbi at Oxford University,
presented this Jewish approach in his
aptly named piece, A Time to Hate[16].

The proper response to the cowardly
brutes who perpetrated the horrific
attacks against America is to hate them
with every fibre of our being and purge
ourselves of any morsel of sympathy
which might seek to understand their
motives. Hatred is a valid emotion…
Contrary to Christianity, which
advocates turning the other cheek to
belligerence and loving the wicked,
Judaism obligates us to despise and
resist the wicked at all costs. For us
to extend forgiveness and compassion to
<sinners> in the name of religion is not
just insidious, it is an act of mocking
G-d, who has mercy for all, yet demands
justice for the innocent. The only
response to Hitler is utter contempt and
violent hatred. The only way to react to
incorrigible evil is to wage an
incessant war against it until it is
utterly eradicated from the earth. I
maintain that any culture that does not
hate Hitler and his ilk is a
non-compassionate society. Indeed, to
show kindness to the murderer is to
violate the victim yet again. Thus, in
the interest of justice, the appropriate
response to the evil person is to hate
him with every fibre of our being and to
hope they find no rest, neither in this
world nor in the next.

XIV

In the struggle of
ideas, there is a formidable weapon of
mass destruction: demonisation of the
opponent. Theologically it is called the
‘Manichean’ heresy. There is no better
systemic weapon if you intend to destroy
society. One should not divide people
unto Sons of Light and Sons of Darkness.

Jews usually are
quite tolerant of ideas produced within
the community. The founder of Zionism
Theodor Hertzl was anything but a pious
Jew. Religious Jews greatly disliked
him. Still, when a Rabbi was asked to
say something good about him, he found
good words: Theodor Hertzl never spoke
on mundane subjects in a synagogue,
never entered a toilet while wearing
phylacteries, he never studied the
Talmud on Christmas Eve. The truth is
that Hertzl never visited a synagogue,
never wore phylacteries, never studied
the Talmud, full stop. In a similar
vein, Jews were quite tolerant of Leon
Trotsky the Communist, and of Yair Stern
the Nazi supporter, for they knew that
every idea has its positive elements.
Nowadays, the leader of Left Opposition
Yossi Sarid was a friend of the
assassinated Judeo-Nazi minister Zeevi
and touchingly eulogised him.

But to the outside
world, Jews usually offered the idea of
the eternally blessed vs. the eternally
damned, of seething rage, of anger and
vengeance. In order to restore the
balance of mind, this Jewish internal
tolerance should be universalised, and
Jewish external intolerance rejected.

Soviet Russia was not
an Evil Empire, nor was Communism
embodied in Stalin and the Gulag.
Sholokhov, Block, Pasternak, Esenin,
Mayakovsky and Deineka embraced the
Revolution and expressed its ideas in
art. It was a land of the great and
partly successful experiment in equality
and brotherhood of Man, of a brave
attempt to defeat the spirit of Greed.
Communists and their supporters tried to
liberate labour, to bring the Kingdom of
Heaven upon earth, to remove poverty and
free the human spirit. Communism brought
forth the social democracy of Europe.

Germany was not an
Evil Empire, nor was the spirit of
organic traditionalism embodied in
Hitler and Auschwitz. The
Traditionalists tried to establish an
alternative paradigm based on Wagner,
Nietzsche and Hegel, to go to the roots
and traditions of the folk. Not in vain,
the best writers and thinkers of Europe
from Knut Hamsun to Louis Ferdinand
Celine to Ezra Pound to William Butler
Yeats to Heidegger saw a positive
element in the Traditionalist organic
approach. If Russia and Germany had not
been demonised, it is quite possible we
would not have seen them coming to such
extremes.

We have to restore
the balance of mind and discourse lost
in the aftermath of the World War Two,
due to the too-complete victory of the
bourgeois ‘Judeo-American’ thought.
While condemning excesses and war
crimes, we should regain the kingdom of
the spirit from Mayakovsky to Pound.
There are no evil men, we are created in
the image of God, and all ideas are
needed to produce new thought.

The two great
protagonists of 1930s and 1940s
committed many atrocities, but whoever
is without sin, let him throw the first
stone. After Dresden and Hiroshima, and
the Deir Yassin and Jenin massacres,
there are not many takers. They should
be de-demonised, as their demonisation
creates a dangerous imbalance of ideas.

We should not
demonise their opponents, either.
America is not an Evil Empire. It can
and should be brought to its senses. The
American spirit of entrepreneurship,
invention, self-reliance, unbridled
freedom and democracy should be kept as
all-human valuable assets.

The Jewish People are
not an Evil Empire. Good organisers and
ambassadors, stubborn and devout, easily
carried away, high-strung, first-class
thinkers and brave soldiers, light
travellers, compassionate and cheerful;
Jews are needed for the prosperity of
mankind.

But every one of
these approaches can destroy the world
if left unchecked.

The Soviets killed
and exiled millions in their drive to
demolish the Old Order. They ruined old
churches, uprooted peasants and
supported uniformity as much as their
American antagonists. The Nazis
unleashed the most horrible war on the
world and killed millions of Slavs and
Jews. Now, the Judeo-American forces
have been unhinged by the completeness
of their victories in 1945 and in 1991.
They understand it as a licence to drive
the world to perdition. Their programme
of globalisation would eliminate all
beauty and specific quality of the
world, kill the spirit, undermine art,
wipe out spirit, destroy nature, undo
social achievements, divide mankind into
Masters and Slaves. Wherever they go,
old cafès and restaurants disappear and
Starbucks and McDonalds take over.
Workers lose their working places,
museums are filled with trash, art is
replaced by TV. Still, they should be
contained, not destroyed.

Usually we discuss
war as the conflict of state interests.
But the never-ending World War Two was
the war of ideas, as well. It was wrong
and unneeded, as various ideas should
coexist in eternal struggle, as Yin and
Yang, or feminine and masculine forces.
The Judeo-American idea will emasculate
the world if left to run unchecked. This
emasculation is strongly felt in the US,
where men do not dare to be men anymore.
They can be sued if they look at a girl,
and sued if they do not look at a girl.
In Beowulf, the great Anglo-Saxon
epic poem, a cruel queen kills every man
who dares to look at her. Little did
they know that the spirit of the cruel
queen will rule supreme in the world.

The Judeo-American
idea has a strong attachment to
biological life, but rejects spirit. It
is not for nothing that no great pieces
of art, no great new ideas appear under
its rule. On the other hand, the purely
masculine tendencies of its opponents
were also dangerous for the survival of
the human race.

All three adversaries
of the last Century had a common
feature: they rejected Christ, the base
of our spirituality. None of the great
leaders of the WWII ever turned to God.
Americans are and Communists were scared
to mention Christ in order not to be
ridiculed or rebuked by Jews. The Nazis
were strongly anti-Christian, and
dabbled in the occult. This is the
fourth element missing for the
restoration of the balance.

Thus, we should look
for a synthesis of the four tendencies:
the organic native love of nature, local
roots and tradition, social communal
justice for all mankind, love of life
and entrepreneurship; and spirituality.
They would present the new meaning of
Cross, and bring mankind to its unity in
spirit, while preserving its beautiful
variety.

XV

Many scholars of the
Rise of the Jews encounter a difficulty.
Their Darwinist instincts called them to
presume some better qualities of the
Jews which led them to succeed. McDonald
came to the conclusion that Jews possess
a higher intelligence, the result of
eugenics and careful breeding. I felt
myself proud while reading his work,
until I looked around at real Jews, my
neighbours. His concept did not survive
encounter with reality. If it is not
higher intelligence, what then?

Darwinists’ error
lays in their inability to see success
as a function of society. In traditional
Gentile societies, a model of success
was provided by a poet, a saint, an
artist, a brave warrior, a good worker
or peasant, a man who made life better
for others. For Homeric Greeks, good
sportsmen, seafarers, poets, musicians
and dancers were the models for success
as we can learn from the wonderful
utopia of the Feacians. These idyllic
people, like the jolly Oxford student of
old, despise a trader and a businessman,
and prefer a good yachtsman.

According to Jews,
there are two different concepts of
success. One, success within the Jewish
community, was achieved by studying the
Talmud. Another, success in the Big
World of Jews and Gentiles. This success
is measured by the ruthless amassing of
money and power.

From the Jewish point
of view, Jews were always successful, as
they always had both sorts of success.
But until recently, the Jewish external
success was not considered a success by
Gentiles at all. There were always
Gentiles who shared their view, but be
they Richard III or Harpagon, they were
considered monsters rather than models
of success. In the Nineteenth Century,
the critical mass of monsters was
achieved and thus the Mammonite world
was born. By actively participating in
discourse (media + universities), Jewish
thinkers and ideologists promoted the
Mammonite idea of success and made it
the standard one in Western society.
Modern Harpagon and Richard, be they
Iacocca or Soros, are generally approved
of in the new society formed by the
Mammonite discourse-masters. The Western
world became Jewish, as Marx put it, and
it adopted the Jewish idea of success.
In plain words, Jews did not ‘become
successful’, rather, their normal
behaviour became a norm of success.

If the discourse of
the US were transferred into
Afro-American hands, it is possible that
good sportsmen and musicians would come
to be considered successful, while
lawyers and bankers would be considered
failures. That would be better for the
future of mankind than the present
adoration of money and power.

XVI

Even the material
success of Jews is not achieved by a
miracle. A tentative explanation was
offered by two Israeli directors and
producers, Menachem Golan and Yoram
Globus. People of meagre talents whose
cinematographic achievements remain
strictly in the B-class, they made a
fortune in Hollywood and produced many
awful films until they suffered a
setback. Their key to success lay in
vertical networking. Golan and Globus
bought cinemas all over England and the
UK, and there they screened the movies
of their choice. They invariably (well,
almost) chose awful movies, as they had
no taste, talent or ability. They said:
If you own a chain of cinemas, you do
not have to worry about the quality of
your movies. Globalisation and creation
of networks is the way to avoid
competition by merit. Instead of opening
a better café, it is easier to buy every
café and turn it into a Starbuck. People
will have to come to your café.

The second reason for
Jewish success is in our mutual
psychological compatibility. Adversaries
usually describe it as Jewish
‘freemasonry’, almost a conspiracy. But
it is quite natural for Jews to like
similar things, like Englishmen like
bacon and eggs. Still it creates a
problem for human development. In Prague
of the 1920s, there were two equally
good but very different writers, an
alienated and abstract Jew, Frantz Kafka
and an earthly Czech Communist Jaroslaw
Hasek. Both are good, both are necessary
for the development of mankind, but the
genius of Kafka is more palatable for
Jews. As there are many more Jewish
professors of literature and newspaper
editors than the Czech ones, it is but
natural that Kafka is universally known
and recognised, while Hasek’s name
remains in Bohemia. More writers imitate
Kafka than so much as consider Hasek. As
a result, mankind, not only America,
turns more and more ‘Jewish’. As writers
know, they must write in a way palatable
to the Jewish editors and professors.
Otherwise they can expect only a
parochial success. Thus, without any
conspiracy, normal human Jewish
tendencies influence the spirit of
mankind by eliminating its beautiful
variety.

Now, these problems
can be solved. While some amount of
private initiative is good, networking
should be banned. One may own a bookshop
or a cinema or a café. But an attempt to
buy or establish control over a second
one should attract criminal prosecution.

An Inuit was hit by a
steam train while visiting the
continent, tells a Northern joke. He
survived the accident, but since then,
he destroys every kettle he sees. They
should be eradicated while small, he
says. After seeing the monopolisation,
we should follow the advice of the wise
Inuit. It is better for us to have a
hundred different cafés than a hundred
Starbucks.

Man’s income should
be capped by a double-average industrial
wage, while above that amount, taxes
should exceed one hundred percent.
Managerial privileges should be capped
severely as well. Media and discourse in
general should be freed. In the area of
human thought, the Brahmanite tendency
of Jews should be made visible and
confronted. The Brahman is not an enemy,
but his traditional tendency to
domination should be counteracted by
better visibility and accountability.

A joint communion of
spirit proclaiming our unity should be
established. It implies rejection of
interest and racial discrimination. St
Ambrose, in his comments on Deut. 23:19,
wrote: “From him exact usury whom it
would not be a crime to kill. Where
there is a right of war, there also is a
right of usury”[17].
People who share communion with their
brothers and sisters in spirit do not
demand usury. But, if the communion is
gone, usury, unlimited exploitation and
slavery come in. Slavery was introduced
by Calvinists and Jews in North America,
while it was unknown in the lands where
the communion united the people in one
Church.

In his witty
Catch-22, Joseph Heller has a General
ask his chaplain in disbelief: “Do
enlisted men pray to the same god as we
do?” This is the idea of the world
without a shared communion. It is not
without reason that the Talmud forbids a
Jew to drink wine with a Gentile, as
sharing wine is a communion. As the
purpose of Jewish Law was to maintain
low-intensity warfare of Jews against
Gentiles, a Jew was also forbidden to
make an interest-free loan to a Gentile.
By sharing communion, society will
overcome this difficulty.

With this, the Rise
of the Jews will be transformed into a
Rise of Man.

The long saga of the
Jewish people is headed for an unknown
end. It began with rejection of
communality, and it ends with the same
question asked again. If Zionism and its
elder brother Mammonitis were to win
world-wide, it would remove variety,
mercy and spirit. If the spirit of
communality wins, the prophecies of old
will become true. We shall say: We be of
one blood, the Palestinian people,
descendents of Abraham, of the
Israelites, of the Apostles, the
rightful dwellers of Palestine, and
their close kin and kith, the wandering
Jewish folk, who came back like the
Prodigal Son to the land of his fathers.
The exiled sons of Palestinian villages,
of Kakun and Suba, will return and they
will rebuild the ruined cities, never
again to be uprooted (Amos 9:15). In the
Holy Land, the two branches of one
people, the Jews and the Palestinians
will unite, intermarry and create a new
folk - like the Normans did in East
Anglia, Sicily and Normandy - never
again to disturb the peace of the world.